*whoops, Kearney was second behind Ericka Vanderlende
*whoops, Kearney was second behind Ericka Vanderlende
This is the only time I'll ever be mentioned on letsrun most likely, but I am the girl who got 31st place.
Benzie is probably the flattest course in Michigan, and the weather that day was absolutely perfect. I think my watch came out to about 3.07.
However, the statement about this being one of those short courses that everyone PRs at, and then finds that PR to be untouchable is false. Kearney (my teammate) broke 17:00 again later in the season, and ended up second at the state meet. I don't think any of the varsity runners from my school (myself included) who set a PR at Benzie had that same PR still standing after the season ended.
I do think that in some ways, early season meets are better evaluators of ability (along with late season meets) because many teams train straight through mid-season meets. Early season meets happen while you're still "fresh" off of summer training, when you've only had maybe 4-5 hard workouts. Late season meets get the benefit of the taper. Many really good girls and teams (at least those with good coaches) plan their season so that they perform best at the state meet, which usually comes at the cost of having a stellar performance midseason at somewhere like Portage.
31st place wrote:
This is the only time I'll ever be mentioned on letsrun most likely, but I am the girl who got 31st place.
Benzie is probably the flattest course in Michigan, and the weather that day was absolutely perfect. I think my watch came out to about 3.07.
However, the statement about this being one of those short courses that everyone PRs at, and then finds that PR to be untouchable is false. Kearney (my teammate) broke 17:00 again later in the season, and ended up second at the state meet. I don't think any of the varsity runners from my school (myself included) who set a PR at Benzie had that same PR still standing after the season ended.
I do think that in some ways, early season meets are better evaluators of ability (along with late season meets) because many teams train straight through mid-season meets. Early season meets happen while you're still "fresh" off of summer training, when you've only had maybe 4-5 hard workouts. Late season meets get the benefit of the taper. Many really good girls and teams (at least those with good coaches) plan their season so that they perform best at the state meet, which usually comes at the cost of having a stellar performance midseason at somewhere like Portage.
All of the conditions that you mentioned were true. The weather was perfect and the course was flat, dry and hard.
Good for you, great race and great season!
I agree as well. When the weather is great, the course is flat and fast, that's what people are suppose to do, set PR's. Congrats Abigail, and you ran faster later in the season:)
So are high school runners in Michigan now allowed to wear GPS watches in races?
In many states, based on NFHS Rules, that would be a violation resulting in a disqualification.
I'm hoping Michigan has an adaptation to the NFHS Rules and this rule ultimately gets dumped sooner than later!
Rules Schmules! wrote:
So are high school runners in Michigan now allowed to wear GPS watches in races?
In many states, based on NFHS Rules, that would be a violation resulting in a disqualification.
I'm hoping Michigan has an adaptation to the NFHS Rules and this rule ultimately gets dumped sooner than later!
How long after a race in Michigan can someone protest the results? I'm hoping finisher 31 won't get busted, but it is a good question about high school racers wearing a GPS watch.
From my understanding, GPS watches are illegal, even in track meets! So many dumb rules the NFHS has and most state associations are just a bunch of idiotic sheep following those ill-conceived rules...sad!
If the course is accurate and the weather is perfect. Any 16:50 girl that is properly coached would be qualified for Footlocker or NXN.
Did all 3 qualify?
If not then that is some poor coaching.
Why would ANY athlete be in anywhere near peak shape in August? That is poor coaching and likely lead to not running your best in late November and early December.
Yes they can wear them in cross country races in Michigan.
This is nothing against her (31st place) at all, but I don't believe her because of her gps as I don't believe them to be accurate enough to measure a 3.1 cross country course, I believe the calibrated wheel that was done by several people.
The girl in 3rd place (senior) ran 17:21 the year before as a junior, and that was not her pr for that year. So she improved 8 seconds pr mile over one year in even better weather than she had when she was a junior.
It's a very fast course that yields what you are ultimately after, fast times on days when the course is dry and the weather is great. That's what happened that day, it was perfect.
Why would any decent Coach be racing their top kids in August? Especially kids that should be racing in December.
If it is a team thing then have them run comfortably with the 2 girl on their team. This is not right for kids.
Bull Hockey wrote:
If the course is accurate and the weather is perfect. Any 16:50 girl that is properly coached would be qualified for Footlocker or NXN.
Did all 3 qualify?
If not then that is some poor coaching.
Why would ANY athlete be in anywhere near peak shape in August? That is poor coaching and likely lead to not running your best in late November and early December.
No, it's not poor coaching. You run as fast as you can that day, they raced.
As the season progresses, you get in better and better shape.
Peak??? Sorry, that's baloney. These girls are in high school, not the Olympics. Did you see how well they ran by. the end of the short season ( 2 months)?
They did get faster but that doesn't mean that their times will show it.
The Midwest FL Regional is in Kenosha. Have you been there? It is not flat and you won't see the same times as Benzie, not to mention the weather in November in Wisconsin. These things DO play a role in their finishing times.
Do you know how many courses, except the Brooklyn Speedway, are as flat and fast as Benzie? Brooklyn is not dead flat either.
They got in better shape as the season went along, but some courses aren't going to show that based on their finishing time. Truthfully, I don't know how else to explain it to you.
Sorry, that's not poor coaching at all. You are simply over-thinking it.
Michiganian (have never run Benzie) wrote:
Yes they can wear them in cross country races in Michigan.
This is nothing against her (31st place) at all, but I don't believe her because of her gps as I don't believe them to be accurate enough to measure a 3.1 cross country course, I believe the calibrated wheel that was done by several people.
The girl in 3rd place (senior) ran 17:21 the year before as a junior, and that was not her pr for that year. So she improved 8 seconds pr mile over one year in even better weather than she had when she was a junior.
It's a very fast course that yields what you are ultimately after, fast times on days when the course is dry and the weather is great. That's what happened that day, it was perfect.
Can you share with me the exact Michigan rule that allows high school runners to wear GPS watches?
IN AUGUST wrote:
Why would any decent Coach be racing their top kids in August? Especially kids that should be racing in December.
If it is a team thing then have them run comfortably with the 2 girl on their team. This is not right for kids.
I thought this at the time that this thread began. This is spot on. These young talented girls were cheated out of an opportunity to prove themselves on a National level because some HS coach wanted to conquer the world during the summer.
Sorry, I can't. I can tell you that I watched a dozen races last Fall and they all wear them. Trust me, if it was illegal, they would be nailed for it.
Case in point: Michigan doesn't play around.
This post has been resurrected! Wow!
No, he wrong (you are most likely the same poster with a different handle). Those 3 girls did not peak at that race and continued to improve. Whoever posted about their times not being as fast was right. I was at 4 of the bigger races this Fall and even go to watch Sparty every year since 2009. Look at what the girls and guys ran there. The weather at Sparty is what destroyed times this year, but look at past years and how fast they ran. Bad coaching? Peaking? I respectfully disagree.
Michiganian (have never run Benzie) wrote:
Sorry, I can't. I can tell you that I watched a dozen races last Fall and they all wear them. Trust me, if it was illegal, they would be nailed for it.
Case in point: Michigan doesn't play around.
http://www.hometownlife.com/story/sports/high-school/northville/2017/10/29/northville-dqd-state-boys-cross-country-meet/811782001/
So another case of confusion with the rules and a team gets cheated out of a trip to the state meet. In most states a uniform violation is a warning, with the second infraction a disqualification - and it's an individual rule. So...does Michigan have different rules on uniforms as well as GPS watches than the NFHS Rules?
Bottom line - did the undergarment have any impact on the race? Does wearing a GPS watch actually "aid" a runner?
Someone needs to have a spine and stand up to the state associations and get rid of these stupid rules, or at least get them written better and get those rules in front of ALL the coaches, parents, and kids.
31st place wrote:
This is the only time I'll ever be mentioned on letsrun most likely, but I am the girl who got 31st place.
Benzie is probably the flattest course in Michigan, and the weather that day was absolutely perfect. I think my watch came out to about 3.07.
However, the statement about this being one of those short courses that everyone PRs at, and then finds that PR to be untouchable is false. Kearney (my teammate) broke 17:00 again later in the season, and ended up second at the state meet. I don't think any of the varsity runners from my school (myself included) who set a PR at Benzie had that same PR still standing after the season ended.
I do think that in some ways, early season meets are better evaluators of ability (along with late season meets) because many teams train straight through mid-season meets. Early season meets happen while you're still "fresh" off of summer training, when you've only had maybe 4-5 hard workouts. Late season meets get the benefit of the taper. Many really good girls and teams (at least those with good coaches) plan their season so that they perform best at the state meet, which usually comes at the cost of having a stellar performance midseason at somewhere like Portage.
You actually just said the course was short and then went on to say it is not one of those short courses. Your GPS measurement of 3.07 proves that the course is short. GPS measurements always come up longer than what the course actually is. If your GPS said 3.07, the course is actually closer to 3 miles. Real 5k courses will come up 3.15-3.25 on GPS watches.
a;slfjaslfj wrote:
31st place wrote:
This is the only time I'll ever be mentioned on letsrun most likely, but I am the girl who got 31st place.
Benzie is probably the flattest course in Michigan, and the weather that day was absolutely perfect. I think my watch came out to about 3.07.
However, the statement about this being one of those short courses that everyone PRs at, and then finds that PR to be untouchable is false. Kearney (my teammate) broke 17:00 again later in the season, and ended up second at the state meet. I don't think any of the varsity runners from my school (myself included) who set a PR at Benzie had that same PR still standing after the season ended.
I do think that in some ways, early season meets are better evaluators of ability (along with late season meets) because many teams train straight through mid-season meets. Early season meets happen while you're still "fresh" off of summer training, when you've only had maybe 4-5 hard workouts. Late season meets get the benefit of the taper. Many really good girls and teams (at least those with good coaches) plan their season so that they perform best at the state meet, which usually comes at the cost of having a stellar performance midseason at somewhere like Portage.
You actually just said the course was short and then went on to say it is not one of those short courses. Your GPS measurement of 3.07 proves that the course is short. GPS measurements always come up longer than what the course actually is. If your GPS said 3.07, the course is actually closer to 3 miles. Real 5k courses will come up 3.15-3.25 on GPS watches.
We got a real detective here!
and he is correct, but that is something many fail to accept.
I'm from a different state and always wheel the courses we compete at because most are not 5000m which is fine. But when my kids run slow and I wheel the course at 5088m, at least I have some data to work with and can explain the performances. Then when everyone runs super fast and I wheel the course at 4905 I also need to adjust the times and break the news to the kids that their times were not as good as reported in the results.
It's unfortunate that it is that way, but that is cross country.